> There are cleaner ways to solve this problem - PeterZ offered > one, but there are other options as well, such as: > > - removing exact-bytes semantics explicitly from almost all > cases and offering a separate (and more expensive, in the > faulting case) memcpy variant for write() and other code that > absolutely must know the number of copied bytes.
That would be a full tree audit of thousands of calls. And any mistake would be a security hole. > - or adding a special no-bytes-copied memcpy variant that the > NMI code could use. That's the duplicated copy path I mentioned. If people really want that I can implement it, although I personally think it's ugly and bloated over engineering for this case. > It might be more work for you, but it gives us a cleaner and more > maintainable kernel. The problem is that you should know this > general principle already, instead you are wasting maintainer > bandwidth via arguing in favor of ugly hacks again and again... The duplicated path is unlikely to be more maintainable than the simple and obvious check. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
